Several petition candidates for the Association of Alumni executive committee object to an advertisement in the May/June issue of the Dartmouth Alumni Magazine that they believe makes false statements about their slate. These candidates support the Association's lawsuit against the College.
The slate that wins the election will decide whether to continue the lawsuit and, according to some alumni, will determine the future direction of the College. The election period begins next week.
The two-page advertisement was placed by Dartmouth Undying, a group that supports candidates who are nominated through the Association and are against the Association lawsuit. The ad depicts Baker-Berry library and a sample Association ballot and includes several paragraphs contrasting the Dartmouth Undying-endorsed slate with the petition slate.
The petition slate also has a two-page advertisement in the magazine.
The Dartmouth Undying advertisement states that the six petition-nominated alumni currently on the Association executive committee "asked the N.H. legislature to enact a law to give the state control over the Dartmouth College charter." Two of these alumni are running for re-election.
Petition candidates interviewed by The Dartmouth said the advertisement's claim was false. While they admitted that some executive committee members supported the legislative effort -- executive committee member Alex Mooney '93 testified in favor of the bill -- the candidates said there was no direct connection between the petition members of the committee or the petition candidates and Rep. Maureen Mooney's, R-Hillsborough, introduction of the legislation.
"I am really disturbed about that charge," said Frank Gado '58, a member of the executive committee and a petition candidate in the upcoming election. "They are saying things for which they have absolutely no warrant."
J. Michael Murphy '61, the petition candidate for committee president, echoed this sentiment.
"No more than one person [on the executive committee] had anything to do with that," Murphy said. "It certainly was not an executive committee action."
The petitioners also questioned the advertisement's claim that the legislation would have given the state "control" over the College's charter. The legislation would have forced the College to seek state approval before amending its charter but would not have given the state the unilateral right to change the College's charter.
"One of the six [petition members of the committee] subsequently testified in favor of the Mooney bill in Concord, the rest of us did not," Gado said in an e-mail. "How odd that the Undying slate trumpets their 'independence,' yet regards one member of our parity slate as speaking, voting and acting in unanimity with the rest of us."
Sam Ostrow '67, the spokesman for Dartmouth Undying, refused to respond directly to the petitioners' accusations, saying, "We are not running against the slate, we are running for Dartmouth."
Ostrow did say, however, that the petition executive committee members' lack of response to Alex Mooney's testimony indicated their approval of the legislation.
"When one of their members tried to have the Dartmouth College case overruled, and none of them bothered to renounce it, as far as I'm concerned, that is support," Ostrow said.
Sean Plottner, the editor of the Dartmouth Alumni Magazine, declined in an e-mail to comment specifically on the advertisements.
